Greetings all,For Solar Fire users, To get the cosmograms in Trees, put your chart up, go to "Reports", when that comes up, you'll see two tabs to the upper left. One says "Reports", the other "Tabulations". Click on "Tabulations", find "Midpoint Trees" and you'll have it. (Use "Modulus" at 45'00).(If you don't get the trees, perhaps your version of Solar Fire is an older one.)

I am wondering if it would be possible for me to post a question here. I have spent the last couple of years doing some very deep healing work and am finally surfacing and able to get back to work and study, this time with a sense of purpose and direction. I have been working through this thread, having read through it several times and worked through my own and a friend's chart (and will continue to work through other charts). I would like to incorporate geodetics in my basic preparation for chart analyses for clients and I would really like to feel confident that I am getting this right. I would also like to be sure I'm getting it right as I feel it could be a very useful/helpful tool with regard to finding homeopathic remedies (I am currently learning homeopathy.) However, I keep coming up against the same issue, which I was also struggling with when I initially went through this thread. I am aware that your time is precious, Rad and that this is an old thread, but it feels important to me to be sure I am doing this correctly. I also think my question might be clarifying for others who might read through this thread.

I understand if you feel it is not something you can do, Rad, and I thank you for your willingness to read this post. I do hope, of course, that it might be possible to get this question/confusion cleared up.

First, I am sorry for the length of this question/post, but I wanted to be sure I am conveying where my confusion is and I don't know how to do that without first providing context. That, as an implied question, along with examples, is what follows:

First, here are the instructions that I am using to construct my cosmograms (from page 5 of this thread):

You will also notice that the arrow at 0 degrees of the cosmo dial is pointed at that Mars. On either side of the 0 degrees you will notice increments of 5 degrees each on either side of that 0 degree marker. And the opposite end of the 0 degrees is the 45 degree marker. To develop your personal cosmogram you will want to note the planets that connect together at the various five degree segments on either side of the 0 degree marker. So in our example cosmogram you will notice that Jupiter is at the 15 degree marker on the left side of the 0 degree marker, and that Venus is also at the 15 degree marker on the right side of the 0 degree marker that is always the reference point in developing these cosmograms.

Here is how I am understanding the instructions:

1) I look specifically and strictly at 5 degree increments. 2) Any planets with a 2 degree orb of those 5 degree increments is considered. 3) If there is a planet (or point) in the corresponding 5 degree increment on the other side, within a 2 degree orb OF THE FOCUS PLANET, then there is a cosmogram. 4) If there is no planet on the other side, within a 2 degree increment of the 5 degree marker, then there is no cosmogram.

Examples:

Mars at 0°Pluto at 5°Mercury at 40° Cosmogram? Yes

Mars at 0°Pluto at 7°Mercury at 42° Cosmogram? Yes

Mars at 0°Pluto at 3°Mercury at 38° Cosmogram? Yes

Mars at 0°Pluto at 7°Mercury at 38° Cosmogram? Yes

Mars at 0°Pluto at 3°Mercury at 42° Cosmogram? Yes

Mars at 0°Pluto at 8°Mercury at 40°, 42° or 38° Cosmogram? No

Mars at 0°Pluto at 2°Mercury at 40°, 42° or 38° Cosmogram? No

Mars at 0°Pluto at 5°, 7° or 3°Mercury at 37° Cosmogram? No

Mars at 0°Pluto at 5°, 7° or 3°Mercury at 43° Cosmogram? No

IF the above is correct, it means that even if Pluto and Mercury form a midpoint with Mars but they are out of orb of the 5° marker, they do not form a cosmogram with Mars.

As one final clarifier (to check my understanding), if Mars were at 2 degrees instead of 0 degrees, then the 5 degree increments being used to determine what planets/points create a cosmogram with Mars would then be 7 degrees (instead of 5), 12 degrees, 19 degrees, etc and in the other direction, 42 degrees, 38 degrees, 33 degrees, etc, with a 2 degree orb being considered from these markers.

From my understanding of these instructions, I come up with this cosmogram for Mars in my chart (I include the NN because I have a skipped step signature in my chart):

Mars |Mercury – Jupiter/NN/SN |Chiron/Uranus – Saturn

Solar Fire, however, shows this to be the Midpoint Tree for Mars (using 45 degree modulus and 1 degree orb as parameters):

Mars |Moon – Pluto | Saturn – Pluto

(It also includes a branch involving the MC and ASC but I understand these to be points specifically associated with the current life and thus not to be included in a cosmogram).

As you can see, my cosmogram and SF's Midpoint Tree are not even close. And it does not seem to matter how I set the parameters, the 2 never resemble one another. I CAN see how SF comes up with its Midpoint Tree and it seems that the reason there is such a significant difference is that SF is doing a straight up Midpoint analysis irrespective of 5 degree increments whereas I am using the 5 degree increments specifically and exclusively. That seems to mean that different planets are included/excluded accordingly.

So, my question is, are we just looking for midpoints?Or are we looking specifically and only at midpoints at 5° markers? Or are we doing a combination of both? (ie, including ALL midpoints but also including planets/points that otherwise might be exlcluded but end up being included due to proximity to 5 degree markers)?

And IF the answer has to do with the 5 degree markers, ie, those are used exclusively to determine what's included and what isn't, I was wondering what the rationale for that was, ie, what is the connection between 5 degree increments and determining timeframes when past lives were lived?

THANK YOU! I very deeply appreciate the chance to ask this question and even more appreciate your willingness to consider it.

These are the instructions, and you have understood these instructions correctly.

You will also notice that the arrow at 0 degrees of the cosmo dial is pointed at that Mars. On either side of the 0 degrees you will notice increments of 5 degrees each on either side of that 0 degree marker. And the opposite end of the 0 degrees is the 45 degree marker. To develop your personal cosmogram you will want to note the planets that connect together at the various five degree segments on either side of the 0 degree marker. So in our example cosmogram you will notice that Jupiter is at the 15 degree marker on the left side of the 0 degree marker, and that Venus is also at the 15 degree marker on the right side of the 0 degree marker that is always the reference point in developing these cosmograms.

Here is how I am understanding the instructions:

1) I look specifically and strictly at 5 degree increments. 2) Any planets with a 2 degree orb of those 5 degree increments is considered. 3) If there is a planet (or point) in the corresponding 5 degree increment on the other side, within a 2 degree orb OF THE FOCUS PLANET, then there is a cosmogram. 4) If there is no planet on the other side, within a 2 degree increment of the 5 degree marker, then there is no cosmogram.

I can't speak to what Solar Fire does as I personally have never used it for this purpose. But others have as I recall, and have spoken to this within the context of the thread at some point.

So the bottom line is very simple: use the cosmo dial and the cosmogram as instructed, place the birth planets within it, and they you will see, very simply, what planets form or do not form the cosmograms.

Thank you so much for your confirmation. One of the reasons I asked is that others on the thread found Solar Fire's Midpoint Trees to be helpful in confirming what they came up with. I have found that it comes up with a completely different set of branches, so wondered if/what I was doing wrong. Thus I had been wondering if perhaps I should abandon doing it by hand and just rely on SF (I have a history of believing I am doing mathematical things just right but then consistently coming up with the wrong answers...). At any rate, given what you have answered, I will rely on what I do by hand and trust that experience will guide me if any changes need to be made. In the two charts I have done, I have found it insightful.

Thank you again, so very much, for letting me post and for your answer!